Ex-chief weapons inspector slams Iraq war as 'tragedy' (Hans Blix)

[Barrett808]

Source: AFP

LONDON (AFP) - Hans Blix, the former chief UN weapons inspector, slammed the Iraq war as a "tragedy" and blamed it on leaders ignoring the facts, in a comment piece published Thursday.

Writing in The Guardian on the five-year anniversary of the US-led invasion of Iraq, Blix, who clashed with Washington in the run-up to the Iraq war, described the war as "a tragedy -- for Iraq, for the US, for the UN, for truth and human dignity."

In the sub-headline to the comment piece, Blix, who headed the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, wrote that responsibility for the war "must lie with those who ignored the facts five years ago".

At the time of the Iraq war, Blix accused the US and Britain of exaggerating the threat from Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's alleged "weapons of mass destruction" -- traces of which have never been found.

In his comment piece, he said the war was a "setback in the world's efforts to develop legal restraints on the use of armed force between states" and added that in 2003, "Iraq was not a real or imminent threat to anybody."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080320/wl_mideast_afp/iraqwar5yearsunnuclearblix

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. 5 and KICK! nt

[jeff30997]

2. K&R

[Arctic Dave]

3. Tragedy? Holy Shit.

Call a duck a duck. This is a fucking disgrace of the highest order. This is in the realm of lunatic dictator getting his rock off disemboweling people. No need to sugar coat this shit anymore.

[beastbitten]

10. "A war of utter folly"

"A war of utter folly"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/20/iraq.usa

[NM Independent]

4. So how long will it be...

Until I see the rest of the world cry "war crimes" and do something about it?

and

Until I see a super duper poll about how the rest of the world sees the US and the Iraq occupation (nation by nation)?

[lovuian]

5. So true

So true

[Bonobo]

6. What!? Millions of dead mother, fathers, sons and daughters and trillions of dollars is a BAD thing?

[AzDar]

7. Ayup.

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. Blix wouldn't take a stand at the time. Wouldn't stick his neck out.

Couldn't give a straight answer. Fuck that guy.

[anakie]

9. So in went George

bit rich to imply Blix wasn't saying anything at the time. I seem to remember him saying things along the lines of 'there is nothing there'. But blame him anyway if it makes you feel better.

Peace

[ConcernedCanuk]

12. BULLSHIT. The United Nations is a peaceful body

.
.
.

So they try to pacify situations.

I don't think that the UN really believed that the USA would take off like a mad dog and attack a defenseless country.

But the USA did with all it's "might" and war-power wizardry.

And 5 years later the USA is still in there trying to conquer a wee nation,

and failing.

USA has lost "face" with the World.

Something the Chinese understand.

And China is watching,

and waiting.

[Scairp]

32. That's not the way I remember it

I do remember that he made an effort to stress that his inspections had turned up nothing, that there was no threat so far as he could tell, and that invading Iraq was pointless, if one thought they were going in to remove WMD's. These are not quotes of course, but whenever he was interviewed about the then-impending invasion, he clearly thought it was a very bad idea. He was still trying to deal with the White House at the time so going on t.v. and pounding his fist on the desk about the invasion would not have made him any friends there. It would have gotten him dissed and disinvited to any further discussions about the subject.

[Voice for Peace]

36. I recall Blix being very clear that there was nothing there and the US was being

absurd, but his voice was drowned out and he was being ridiculed by the machine.

[struggle4progress]

39. Interview with Hans Blix (El Pais / April 2003)

The US Lost Patience When Iraq Began to Collaborate with the UN
By Ernesto Ekaizer
El Pais
April 9, 2003

... "The American Government lost patience when the Government of Iraq began to collaborate actively with us as we asked", recalls Blix, evoking the first days of March of this year passed, when the Americans and British decided that there was no longer a place for the task of the inspectors ...

Q. Up to now, 19 days after the invasion, there has been no trace of biological and chemical weapons. The American special forces state that this is because they are stored in Baghdad. Do you believe this?

A. United States as well as the United Kingdom always told us that Iraq possessed those weapons. We never accepted this statement as an established fact. Establishing this was exactly what our work consisted of. Sadly, both Governments were seen to be very impatient in the first days of March. And they did not leave us to finish the task. A few months were need for us to determine if the Iraqi possessed the arms the Americans and British insisted they had. I am very curious to know if they are really going to find them. I believe that no one has more interest in this than I ...

When they named me president of Unmovic, I made it clear that we were going to create an independent body of inspectors. That I did ...

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0409lostpatience.htm

Read the friggin interview if you don't remember what happened ...

[Baby Snooks]

11. "How were we to know?"

Hans Blix is an apologist for Hans Blix. If you read it carefully, he is trying not to blame anyone. Just excuse everyone.

Reality of Saddam Hussein is he was a brutal dictator. But there were no terrorists in Iraq. Because of Saddam Hussein.

Even with the sanctions, the Iraqi people had lights, water, and had lives. We have plunged them into hell. And have called it liberation.

They had universities. They had museums. They had sidewalk cafes where they spent their days. They had a rich heritage. And a rich future. Despite Saddam Hussein. Some would say because of Saddam Hussein.

The claims about Saddam Hussein were also made about the Shah of Iran. Are the people of Iran better off without the Shah?

The claims about the Shah were never proven. Not unless you accept the CIA produced evidence. The only ones who accept it are the same ones who still accept the CIA produced evidence of Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction. Later claimed to be evidence of Saddam Hussein having the capability of producing weapons of mass destruction. In the end, even that has not been proven.

There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There were no torture chambers in Iran. Both Saddam Hussein and the Shah of Iran were brutal. One need only look at Osama bin Laden to realize why they were.

In both Iraq and Iran there was only oil. Millions have died because of the oil and the greed and the maniacal vision of oligarchy on the part of the Bushes. And on the part of those in Congress who were complicit both times. "The Shah must go" they screamed in unison. "Saddam Hussein must go" they screamed in unison. Without anyone really asking why.

The Bushes are nothing less than war criminals. Worse than Hitler. The CIA is nothing more than their personal SS.

Congress should have put a stop to this. But Madame Speaker decided not to. She is, in the end, nothing more than another of Hitler's Women.

The Empress sitting next to the Emperor. While millions scream out for justice. She waves her hand. There is no justice. The Empress has spoken. May she rot in hell for eternity along with the Bushes.

[Finite]

14. To be fair..

Blix was caught up in the middle of this. The Bush administration was putting huge pressure on him to declare that Saddam was in breach of 1441, but there simply wasn't anything there to find.

What was Blix supposed to say? He did his best but had to get out of the way when the bombing campaign started.

[groovedaddy]

20. Blix's job was made exceedingly difficult by Saddam and Bush

Saddam wanted people/nations to believe he DID HAVE WMD, even though he didn't. Probably part of his national defense strategy. Toward this end, he kept Blix & crew guessing, though they suspected he had nothing.
Bush was looking for (and making up) any excuse to go in to fulfill the Neo-Con's biggest wet dream - occupation of Iraq and control over oil reserves. They really didn't care that Blix wasn't finding anything.

[earthlover]

16. Madame Speaker? If you are referring to Pelosi, she wasn't speaker then

[Baby Snooks]

29. She is now

And the war continues on and Bush is still in office. Thanks to her.

[anniebelle]

13. A tragedy indeed! How sad for everyone involved. n/t

[Swagman]

15. weapons inspector Richard Butler said don't invade as well

and said there were no WMD.

I still have the leaflet sent out by deposed scumbag John Howard in Australia numbering all the WMD's Saddam had ( including those human shredding machines) and that was he was joinng the invasion-and promising he wouldn't join any invasion for the reason of "regime change". So we changed his regime in the end.

[Drifter]

17. "So ?" - Dick Chenney

Cheers
Drifter

[rucognizant]

18. Right on, Drifter!

Hans Blix DID STATE CLEARLY, that there were no weapons, and Dick Cheney said "SO?" Let the Bombing begin!
Too bad so many Americans were'nt listening at the time!
I HEARD BLIX! I MARCHED, I CALLED THE WHITE HOUSE!

[The Wizard]

19. Is there enough evidence

to start building scaffolds? The facts are damning and impeachment if off the table. The Bush cartel must have some very damaging information on The Speaker or she's complicit in the continuing criminal enterprise known as Bush. The shyster Pelosi has to be defeated in the primary as a message to other enablers that "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take this anymore."
Being honest with known liars and criminals is a losing proposition.
Now if we could get hand counted paper ballots we could have free and fair elections that reflect the will of the people. Stalin was right about those who count the vote determining everything.

[fascisthunter]

21. Enough Evidence to Start Impeachment Proceedings (nt)

[liberal N proud]

22. May the last paragraph ring true...

He said that one positive sign to emerge from the conflict was that "it may be that the spectacular failure of ensuring disarmament by force, and of introducing democracy by occupation, will work in favour of a greater use of diplomacy and 'soft power'."

Let there be peace.

[pleah]

23. It was a crime!

Over 1 million dead, over 5 million orphans almost 4,000 soldiers dead. Thousands permanently disabled.

[go west young man]

24. They all knew all along Iraq had terminated at least 90% of it's

weapons program in 1991 after the 1st Gulf War. The U.N. weapons inspection reports from that time are available online. Our media chose not to cover that fact. Hans Blix did point that out before the US invaded. He stayed matter of fact in regards to the 2002 inspections. Scott Ritter was the real brave one in this matter. He stuck his neck out from the get go. He's a Marine to be held up high. He spoke truth to power and was shot down by our own complicit media.

[defendandprotect]

38. For Gawd's sake, there's film of Powell and Rice saying "no enemies, anywhere!" . . .

in fact, they're joking that we might have to invent some --- !!!

[davekriss]

41. Scott Ritter should be recognized for the truth hero he is (nt)

[Broadslidin]

25. May the Imperial u.s. slowly strangle itself in financial debt and....

forgiveness forever denied.... :nuke: :patriot: :nuke:

[snot]

26. Everyone paying attn knew: Blix et al. were begging for just a few more weeks

or months at most to complete their task of proving the negative, that there were no WMD.

It was clear the only thing urgent about invading Iraq was that we had to invade BEFORE Blix succeeded in completing this task.

Everyone knew who wanted to know; this is why I cannot forgive any congressional rep. who voted in favor of the resolution authorizing Bush to invade.

[davekriss]

42. That is exactly correct

That is how I remember it.

[go west young man]

27. Direct link to Gaurdian article and comments.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/20/iraq.usa

[marias23]

28. War is About Maintaining the American Quality of Life. Period.

Sorry Hans, the war was about only one thing - maintaining the American quality of life -and that's why most Americans don't care. They say they want it to end, but they do not want expensive oil and the consequences to our way of life. We will take what we want, when we want it, as we have always done - to live well while others die and live in misery. End of story.

[newspeak]

30. quality of life for whom?

Those of us who are hardworking, middle income Americans, are being taken to the cleaners. And, those who have children in the military are paying the price. We are also being brought down, for the few corrupt, war profiteering greedheads. Our infrastructure is falling apart, we are in so much debt to foreign entities, our social programs are being cut, our civil liberties are being compromised--I believe we are also being taken down -and might be viewing ourselves as another third world banana republic very soon if things don't change. The so-called New World Order is just the Old World Order, robber barons wanting full reign on the world. Our foreign policy has always aided business-that's why some dictators are just fine, like Pinochet and others shall not be tolerated. As long as corporations can do business with such entities, everything is fine.

[marias23]

31. Re: Quality of Life for Whom?

For you and me. Despite everything you say (which I agree with) from lower middle class on up we live so well we don't even notice it. Here people complain if they have to wait too long on a supermarket line!

[davekriss]

44. You really think the Bush regime was...

...concerned about our quality of life? You must be one of those one percenters, you know, those with yearly incomes above $345,000 per year? You know, Bush's "base", Bush's pioneers. For many years Bush has done well for them. However, given that we are truly 1929 all over again and facing the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression, Bush has destroyed even the goose that lays the golden egg. Chaos is ahead. Bush will go down in history as the worst pResident ever to occupy the White House.

[Baby Snooks]

34. The Old World Order

This conspiracy to establish oligarchy as the foundation of a "new" Constitution was the result of the robber barons being restricted with regard to monopolization at the turn of the 20th Century and of all the families hurt most it was the Rockefeller family that planted the seeds and watered the garden so to speak. Samuel Bush ingratiated himself to the Rockefellers and ran an empire few knew about from Columbus and he mentored not only his son Prescott but many others in the ideology of fascism as the ideal of federalism as well as the ideology of oligarchy, and the Rockefellers of course funded it all including the promotion of eugenics which of course tied them into the ideology of the Nazis who Prescott Bush funded using the Harriman money. And where we are now is where we were then. The dynasty of the Bushes. The vision of Samuel Bush.

When Eisenhower warned us of the dangers of the military-industrial complex, he was warning us about the Bushes and those who supported the same vision of oligarchy as the Bushes. One need only read that warning to realize what, and who, was behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy who understood the warning and who represented a threat to the military-industrial complex and to Halliburton in particular which of course enriched itself off the Vietnam War as well as the current "war" which is not really a war at all but rather a colonization of a sovereign nation. That of course was really the aim of the Johnson policy in Vietnam. It was not the policy of Kennedy.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/vietnam.htm

While Kennedy did not represent a threat per se, he did. Halliburton had already discovered the lucrative nature of war. Particularly war that could be created and managed and administered.

When you really look at our history during the course of the 20th Century you begin to understand the fallacy of political parties and in the reality of there now being only one party.

The Republicans let go of their party. The Democrats seem unwilling to do so. That defines best the difference between Democrats and Republicans at this point.

[ConcernedCanuk]

40. "War is About Maintaining the American Quality of Life. Period. " - Welcome to DU!

.
.
.

War is About Maintaining the American Quality of Life. Period.

I think you got it right there.


Hope you can filter through the contraversies here - but I suspect you can

Again

Welcome to DU

:hi:

[davekriss]

45. i.e., Naked Imperialism (nt)

[davekriss]

43. Well war worked real well, didn't it marias23?

Lessee', oil was about $18-$19 per bbl when Bush took office. Reached $110 per bbl recently. Yea, Bush really had our quality of life in mind when he decided to invade Iraq, didn't he?

(However, I recognize your sarcistic spotlight on our naked imperialism here :) ).

Anyone remember the final scenes of Three Days of the Condor? So prescient in so many ways...

[MasonJar]

33. Actually Hans Blix did speak out at the time, so saying he didn't is

not only unfair but untruthful. The US tried its best to get him fired for speaking out.

[SpikeTss]

35. No, it's absolutely not a tragedy. It's a crime

The supreme crime actually in international law:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4416.htm

"The grand strategy authorises the US to carry out preventive war: preventive, not pre-emptive. Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war might be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term "preventive" is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the supreme crime that was condemned at Nuremberg.

That was understood by those with some concern for their country. As the US invaded Iraq, the historian Arthur Schlesinger wrote that Bush's grand strategy was "alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at the time of Pearl Harbor, on a date which, as an earlier American president said it would, lives in infamy"."

[defendandprotect]

37. And right he is! And right he was about WMD being ZIP . . .